Habitat Debate Vol.11 No. 4, Legacy of the Urban Management Programme

Habitat Debate

In this issue

Our common past.......6

The UMP has a future on its own.......10

Strengthening local governance ............... 11

Giving women a voice ..........................13

In action against AIDS...........................17

Best practices...........20

U N I T E D N A T I O N S H U M A N S E T T L E M E N T S P R O G R A M M E

The legacy of the Urban Management Programme

2 Habitat Debate December 2005

After nearly two decades, theAAUnited Nations system is handing overAAthe Urban Management Programme to its

beneficiaries at the regional, national and

local level. This passing of the baton of one

of the largest global urban programmes is

in every sense a measure of its great success.

We in the United Nations, and the many

bilateral donor agencies who have so gen-

erously supported it over the years, have

every reason to be proud.

It is indeed one of those rare occasions

where a catalyst for the improvement of

human settlements around the world has

gained such momentum that it has taken

on a life of its own, and is now able to move

ahead with its vast repository of knowledge,

best practices and innovations in making

our rapidly urbanizing world a better place

for all. It is as much a new beginning, as it

is the end of an era of which we take stock

in this issue of Habitat Debate.

As a global programme, the UMP has

made many significant contributions in

building the capacity of local authorities

in developing countries through the pro-

motion of pro-poor participatory gov-

ernance and poverty reduction strategies.

The programme has supported the imple-

mentation of the Habitat Agenda and the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

at local level through partnership with na-

tional governments, local authorities, and

civil society organizations. Indeed the

UMP has worked in 120 cities in 57 devel-

oping countries through six regional and

sub-regional offices, 19 regional anchor

institutions and over 40 national and local

institutions and other networks of com-

munity-based organizations, NGOs and

municipal associations. This is certainly an

impressive record.

The 21st century will witness massive

and rapid urbanization, with two billion

new residents in cities of the developing

world in the next 25 years. This process,

though stimulated by economic develop-

ment, has also led to sharp divisions in

growth between cities and among social

groups. We already see increased urbani-

zation of poverty with one billion poor ur-

ban residents living in slums. For many

local authorities, it has not been possible

to meet the challenges of generating suf-ff

ficient employment, providing adequate

housing and meeting the basic needs of

their citizens. The challenge is to improve

equity, efficiency, productivity and gov-

ernance in order to provide sustainable

livelihoods, safe and secure living environ-

ments and a better quality of life for the

urban poor.

The Urban Management Programme

has played a pivotal role here. It has brought

urban poverty, environmental sustainabil-

ity and participatory governance, through

its innovative city consultation process to

the fore of the national agenda in many

countries and municipalities. The UMP,

working closely with UNDP and other

organizations of the UN system, helped

strengthen inter-agency cooperation. The

networks of cities, anchor institutions and

other partners working with UMP today

provide a rich resource base for human set-

tlements-related activities. And although

the UMP is now being phased out, its net-

works of anchor institutions and cities and

the rich experience of almost two decades

should not be lost. Many of us, in cities

around the world, have worked hard and

spent significant resources and energy to

establish these networks.

The overall mission of UN-HABITAT

is to promote socially and environmen-

tally sustainable human settlements devel-

opment and the achievement of adequate

shelter for all with the objective of reduc-

ing urban poverty and social exclusion.

This mandate today has been strengthened

by the Millennium Development Goal on

environmental sustainability, focusing on

biodiversity (target 9), water and sanita-

tion (target 10) and slum upgrading (tar-

get 11).

At the United Nations summit meet-

ing in September 2005, world leaders gave

this mandate special priority. The summit

endorsed not only slum upgrading, but

also slum prevention as common goals. At

the global level, the Habitat Agenda and

the MDGs have identified a possible road-

map and time frame to achieve these goals.

The pro-poor participatory city consul-

tation approach of UMP focused on the

process, but was weak on follow-up invest-

ments and actions.

UN-HABITAT is moving forward with

the implementation of the MDGs through

its Water and Sanitation programmes in

Africa, Asia and Latin America. Its new

programme called the Slum Upgrading

Facility (SUF) is aimed at mobilizing re-

sources for slum upgrading. The idea is to

unlock capital for pro-poor investment,

and to promote and coordinate a new set

of partnerships to raise domestic and in-

ternational funding for affordable low-in-

come housing and urban infrastructure in

the developing world.

In passing the UMP baton to the an-

chor institutions, I am sure that we will

be working closely with many of our UMP

partners at every level in this new quest.

Anna Kajumulo TibaijukaExecutive Director

A Message from the Executive Director

The Urban Management

Programme has played a

pivotal role in bringing

urban poverty, environmental

sustainability and participatory

governance, through its

innovative city consultation

process to the fore of the

national agenda in many

countries and municipalities.

3Habitat Debate December 2005

Cover PhotoThe fabled city of Jodhpur in India, with

good urban practices. Photo © JeremyHorner / Panos.

EditorRoman Rollnick

Editorial AssistanceTom Osanjo

Design & LayoutInformation Services Section, UN-HABITAT

Editorial BoardDaniel Biau (Chair)Lucia KiwalaAnantha KrishnanDinesh MehtaEduardo López MorenoJane NyakairuFarouk TebbalMariam YunusaNicholas You

Published byUN-HABITATP.O. Box 30030, GPONairobi 00100, KENYA;Tel: (254-20) 621234Fax: (254-20) 624266/7,623477,624264Telex: 22996 UNHABKEE-mail:[email protected]: http://www.unhabitat.org/

ISSN 1020-3613

Opinions expressed in signed articles

are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect the official views

and policies of the United Nations

Human Settlements Programme

(UN-HABITAT). All material in this

publication may be freely quoted or

reprinted, provided the authors and

Habitat Debate are credited.

Contents

A MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

OPINION From research to ownership – the legacy of the UrbanManagement Programme, Akin L. Mabogunje........................4

the Urban Management Programme, Michael Cohen.............5

OVERVIEW Our Common Past: the contribution of the UrbanManagement Programme, Dinesh Mehta ...............................6

FORUM Two decades of urban management, Daniel Biau ..................8

UNDP support to the Urban ManagementProgramme – connecting global actors to localrealities, G. Shabbir Cheema, Jonas Rabinovitchand Robertson Work ...............................................................9

FORUM The UMP has a future on its own, Stig Egnell.......................10

Strengthening local governance, poverty reduction, and a better environment. ..................................................... 11

REGIONAL Building urban management in Asia,Nathaniel von Einsiedel.........................................................12

Giving women a voice in Urban Governance – Experiences from UMP-Asia, Girija Shrestha and Ranjith Perera .......................................................................13

The Urban Management Programme in theArab States, ...........................................14

Democratic urban management in Latin America and the Caribbean, Rocío Lombera ......................................15

City consultations with poor people in Belem, Brazil.............16

The UMP in action – bringing local authorities intothe frontline against AIDS, George Matovu...........................17

Managing biomedical waste in Dakar, Senegal,Salimata Seck .......................................................................18

BEST PRACTICES Nigeria • Sri Lanka, • Thailand • Tunisia................................20

PUBLICATIONS The Urban Management Programme • Urban-RuralLinkages Approach to Sustainable Development • International Migrants and the City • Towards the Poverty Eradication Goal – The Structure and

Industry in Eastern Africa ......................................................21

EVENTS New Deputy Executive Director for UN-HABITAT • A new international drive for better cities • A new record for World Habitat Day observances • China meeting • UN-HABITAT to the rescue of Pakistani quake victims • Major Norwegian boost for UN-HABITAT’s water and sanitation trustfund • Global Parliamentarians on Habitat • Upcoming Events

• Upcoming issuesof Habitat Debate ......................................................... 22 & 23

4

Habitat Debate December 2005

Opinion

From research to ownership – the legacy of

the Urban Management Programme

By Akin L. Mabogunje

The “urban reality” in any country is a multi-faceted phe-

nomenon. The agglomerations of citizens in large, compact

settlements covering substantial areas of a country cannot be

treated as an abstraction.

Yet, it is a distressing fact that many policy makers in gov-

ernments, international organizations and donor agencies have

difficulty in accepting this reality and conceding that its devel-

opment and management has to be confronted deliberately and

purposefully in its totality and not as a series of disparate sectors

of activities.

Even the World Bank, for many years, saw urban centres in

this mode as only a series of infrastructural investment prospects,

such as in transportation and water, rather than as a communi-

ty whose capacity for action underpins such investments. It was

to deepen an appreciation of the challenges presented by the ur-

ban phenomenon worldwide that Michael Cohen and his team

in the Urban Development Unit of the World Bank decided to

launch in 1986 a 10-year research programme called the Urban

Management Programme. The programme was promoted t the

time in partnership with the United Nations Centre for Human

Settlement (UNCHS) and with funding from the United Nations

Development Programme.

Over the next two decades, the Urban Management Programme

emerged as perhaps one of the largest global technical assistance en-

deavours in the urban sector. During its first five years (1986-1991),

the programme, although largely funded by the UNDP, was housed

in the World Bank in Washington. It undertook research into five

principal areas – Urban Land, Urban Environment, Municipal

Finance, Urban Infrastructure and Urban Poverty. It sought to de-

velop manuals and toolkits to help cities in these areas.

The major transformation, however, occurred with the ap-

pointment of Shabbir Cheema to the UNDP in 1991. Following

a UNDP evaluation, it was decided that for greater effectiveness

and impact, the Programme not only needed to be regionalized

but also to engage in capacity building of regional experts and di-

rect involvement of cities in developing countries.

Consequently, regional offices were opened in Abidjan, Cote

d’Ivoire (for the sub-Saharan African Region), Cairo, Egypt (for

the Arab States), Bangkok, Thailand (for the Asia Pacific Region)

and Quito, Ecuador (for Latin America and the Caribbean

Region). Regional Managers of the Programme were appointed

for these offices working under a Coordinator based in the then

UNCHS in Nairobi, Kenya. Later sub-regional centres were es-

tablished in Johannesburg, South Africa for Eastern and Southern

Africa, and in New Delhi, India, for South Asia.

Over the following fifteen years, the regionalized Programme

went through three phases of maturation and became a real cata-

lyst for direct local action and eventual ownership by what came

to be known as “anchor institutions”, and by mayors of cities in

each of the regions.

The first phase (1992-1996) entailed enhancing the proficien-

cy of regional panels of experts through workshops and consul-

tations to introduce new policies and tools. Attempts were also

initiated to determine where the anchor institutions were to be

located.

The second phase (1997-2001) saw the anchor institutions

promoting participatory mechanisms as the major strategy of

the Programme for enhancing the quality of urban management.

Participatory mechanisms were particularly important for City

Consultations, which were seen as critical for dealing with prob-

lems of urban poverty, urban environmental sustainability, and

good urban governance. By the end of this phase, some 19 re-

gional anchor institutions had been established in all the regions

along with 40 partner national institutions. Some 120 city con-

sultations were conducted.

The third phase (2002-2006) whilst continuing all of these

themes, capitalizing on knowledge management of the informa-

tion gained, and adding the control of the HIV/AIDS pandemic

to its concerns, initiated the process of gradual international dis-

engagement. It witnessed the gradual transfer of ownership of the

Programme to the anchor institutions and the development of re-

gional national partner institutions.

After two decades, the questions could, therefore, be asked:

What has been the legacy of the Urban Management Programme?

How far has the process of improving urban management been ad-

vanced in the various regions of the developed world?

I believe there can be no better testimony to the legacy of the

Programme than first, the existence in each region today of a

very active constituency of stakeholders in the urban manage-

ment field comprising the regional networks of institutions, ex-

perts and practitioners, informed academics, consultancy firms,

non-governmental organizations and city managers. Second, the

existence of these networks has meant vast improvement in the

database, knowledge, and expertise available for dealing with

problems of urbanization in individual countries and regions.

But thirdly and most importantly, the existence of these networks

has enabled the new international effort at urban development

known as the Cities Alliance to take off effectively without much

concern with issues of capacity building.

Yet, in spite of this legacy, there is no room for complacen-

cy. The enormity of the challenge which the Urban Management

Programme was set up to confront some twenty years ago remains

as daunting as ever. With the world’s urban population projected

to rise to more than 53 per cent of the total by the year 2015 and

with more than 90 per cent of the 1 billion increase between 2000

and 2015 occurring in developing countries, the task of ensuring

that policy makers in governments, international organizations and

donor agencies generally treat the problems of their exploding ur-

ban population and sustainable urban environment with the exi-

gent seriousness that they deserve is going to be as critical as ever.

This is particularly so if many countries of the developing world are

to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which the

United Nations and the whole of the global community had set

themselves to achieve within the next few decades.

Professor Akin L. Mabogunje is the Chairman (retired) of the

Nigerian Presidential Technical Committee on Housing and

Urban Development. Based in Ibadan, he was awarded the 1998

Habitat Scroll of Honour for his academic contributions to urban

development in Africa.

5

Habitat Debate December 2005

Opinion

Present at the Creation: Reflections on

the Urban Management Programme

By Michael Cohen

My involvement with the Urban Management

Programme came in the mid-1980s through my regular

participation in UN-HABITAT Governing Council meetings as a

member of the World Bank delegation. During the 1980s there

was considerable concern among urban staff at the Bank that UN-

HABITAT needed to become a stronger institution in order to

play a larger role in international urban assistance.

We were frustrated by the fact that UN-HABITAT’s work pro-

gramme seemed too dispersed over a wide range of subjects and,

given the limited financial resources of the organization, unable

to really focus on key urban issues. Many of us believed that a

stronger UN-HABITAT would be a major asset in internation-

al urban assistance.

This perception led to discussions between Anthony Churchill,

the Director of the Water and Urban Development Department

of the World Bank, and Dr. Arcot Ramachandran, Executive

Director of Habitat, about the possibility of the Bank helping the

agency acquire more financial resources to build up a critical mass

of expertise on high priority subjects. An agreement was reached

about a joint approach to the United Nations Development

Programme and a polling of resources to focus on various subject

areas of urban management.

Later, in 1989, when I returned to take over the Urban

Development Division in the Bank, I found an elaborate tri-par-

tite collaboration between UN-HABITAT, UNDP, and the Bank.

Staff and consultants working under this programme were pro-

ducing a variety of state of the art papers – which were mistaken-

ly called “policy papers”, because they were not determining the

policy of any institution.

In the early 1990s, the UMP seemed to me to have wildly ex-

aggerated perceptions of its own self-importance.

At no time did the UMP ever exceed US$5 million per year. Yet

the Bank’s urban lending programme during the 1990s averaged

from US$1-2 billion in projects, all of which included at least 10-

15% in technical assistance and studies. In other words, the Bank

was lending, on the low side, from US$100 million to the high

side US$300 million a year in urban technical assistance.

Indeed, the UMP seemed to be heavily relying on the World

Bank urban staff, such as William Dillinger and Fitz Ford, for

generating policy approaches apart from the Bank’s work.

This point was underlined in the commitment made by the

Bank at Habitat II in Istanbul in June 1996 when Mr. Caio Koch-

Weser, then Managing Director of the World Bank, committed

the Bank to US$15 billion over 5 years in urban lending. These

funds were available for country projects, but actually only about

half that amount – still a considerable sum – was allocated to ur-

ban lending.

UNDP’s “exaggerated” view of the importance of the pro-

gramme undermined the credibility of the programme in the

Bank and reduced the interest of Bank urban staff who might

have worked with the UMP. This can be understood as inter-

agency rivalry - with UNDP becoming increasingly resentful of

the Bank in that period.

The two major contributions of the UMP, in my view, appear

to have been:

The decentralization of capacity outside of Nairobi, New

York, and Washington, to regional offices where local initi-

atives and priorities were heard and supported.

The establishment of a forum of donors and aid-related in-

stitutions to discuss urban issues. This group proved to be

the forerunner of the Cities Alliance and helped to advance

the international debate on urban issues. A case can be

made that the UMP contributed to the City Development

Strategy work now promoted by the Cities Alliance.

Finally, while I believe that these two contributions were sig-

nificant, it has to be asked whether a truly hard-headed evalu-

ation of the UMP would give us all very high grades. I suspect

not. It is not evident to me on the basis of my admittedly limited

knowledge of the present programme that the UMP can claim to

have had a major impact on the process of urbanization in devel-

oping countries. This suggests to me that greater humility would

have been more appropriate on the part of the participants dur-

ing the 1990s.

Michael Cohen, former Chief of the Urban Development

Division, World Bank, is now the Director, Graduate Program in

International Affairs, New School University, New York.

6 Habitat Debate December 2005Overview

Our Common Past: the contribution of the Urban Management ProgrammeBy Dinesh Mehta

The two decades of UMP experience

is a valuable depository of knowledge,

innovative best experiences, and new pol-

icy initiatives. Even though the UMP as a

programme has ended, its principles and

knowledge are sustained and used in im-

proving urban management practices in

the developing countries through various

urban programmes and the urban govern-

ance campaign.

Responding tothe global agendaAs a global programme, designed and gov-

erned collectively by global partners, the

UMP provided a platform to focus on

putting urban issues on the international

agenda. The underlying vision of the UMP

was to respond to the Habitat Agenda

themes of sustainable urban development f

and the urbanisation of poverty. The initial

perspective was a global one, concentrat-

ing on the development of urban manage-

ment frameworks and tools.

But with the process of decentraliza-

tion being initiated in many countries,

the UMP programme management struc-

ture was decentralised by establishing

four regional offices in Asia, Africa, Latin

America, and the Arab States region. These

regional offices operated under a common

mandate and had a common set of oper-

ating procedures. But they adopted differ-

ent approaches to translate the global tools

and frameworks to regional and national

circumstances.

The United Nations Conference on

Human Settlements (Habitat II) in

Istanbul in 1996, identified major princi-

ples guiding future activities of the UN sys-

tem. In response to these, the UMP began

working directly with local governments

in developing countries to build their ca-

pacity. During this phase, over 120 city

consultations in 57 countries were carried

out through regional anchor institutions

Promoting new paradigmsImproved urban governance is one of the

most important factors in reaching the

potential of cities, not only in addressing

the challenge of urban poverty, but also

in harnessing the economic opportuni-

ties. The programme has been at the fore-

front promoting new paradigms of urban

development through its activities at the

global, regional and local level. The UMP

aimed to supplement the largely techno-

cratic processes used by urban managers in

dealing with a range of urban issues, with

a more inclusive approach of city consul-

tations that promoted participation and

empowerment. In a sense, the UMP suc-

ceeded in shifting the focus away from

‘management’ to ‘governance’ at the local

level. It was seen as the operational arm

of the urban governance campaign. The

city consultation approach that promoted

pro-poor participatory governance used a

range of thematic areas as entry points to

promote these new paradigms.

Fostering innovationThe UMP has been at the forefront of sup-

porting innovative urban management

practices and fostering its adaptation in

other countries. For example, the initial

activities in urban agriculture in a few cit-

ies have now been replicated through a

network of cities involved in urban agricul-

ture in Latin America and the Caribbean,

Asia and Africa.

Similarly, the UMP has been instru-

mental in promoting management of the

HIV/AIDS pandemic at local level. The

Participatory Budgeting practiced in cities

of Brazil was promoted by UMP in Latin

America. Through UN-HABITAT’s urban

governance campaign, tool-kits have been

developed to promote the practice of par-

ticipatory budgeting. The UMP’s flexible

demand-driven approach to take up new

and innovative ideas has resulted in major

programmes in UNDP and UN-HABITAT

that sustain these innovations.

Strategy of City ConsultationsThe UMP city consultations are aimed

at promoting participatory urban devel-

opment. As the UMP guidelines on city

consultations states: “Participatory devel-

opment stands for partnership which is

built upon the basis of dialogue among

various actors, during which the agenda is

jointly set, and local views and indigenous

knowledge are deliberately sought and re-

spected. This implies negotiations rather

than the dominance of an externally set

project agenda. Thus people become ac-

tors instead of being beneficiaries. ”

Through the process of participation of

civil society, the UMP city consultations

sought to cement a true partnership among

the civil society and the local government.

Many innovative tools and approaches for

engaging civil society were adopted during

these consultations. Despite the different

circumstances under which local govern-

ments operate, many cities were able to

derive significant benefits from the city

consultations.

The city consultations were generally

undertaken in those cities that had dem-

onstrated their willingness to engage in a

participatory process. These cities also had

some capacity to improve their internal or-

ganization, service delivery and credibility

with stakeholders. There was also a strong

presence of organized stakeholder groups

in these cities. These characteristics seem

to be a pre-requisite for a successful city

consultation process.

Anchor InstitutionsUnlike most technical assistance pro-

grammes that depend on expert consult-

ants, the UMP strategy was to locate the

city level activities in local institutions.

These institutions were referred to as “an-

chor” institutions, where the UMP princi-

ples, philosophy and knowledge would be

sustained beyond the life of programme.

The UMP strategy to engage anchor insti-

tutions has provided additional value to

the programme.

As a result of their engagement with

the Programme, these regional institu-

tions have been able to expand their ac-

tivities and gain further recognition in

their regions. The anchor institutions of

the UMP are established leaders in the

field of urban development. However,

through their association with the

Programme, many institutions had the

opportunity to extend the geographic

and thematic coverage of their activities.

These institutions are now well recog-

nised, not only in their own countries,

but also in the region through their ac-

tivities related to the UMP.

The transition of the UMP from a UN-

managed programme run by the anchor

institutions in the past two years has been

an important experience in building “val-

ue-based’ partnerships.

7Habitat Debate December 2005 Overview

Vision Sustainable urban development

Improved living conditions for the poor

Promoting New Paradigms Partnership

Participatory governance

Empowerment of local actors, especially the poor

Thematic Entry-points Land Management, Municipal Administration and Finance, Urban

Environment, Poverty Reduction, Governance, Gender, Urban

Agriculture, HIV/AIDS

Key-strategies City-consultations

Anchor institutions and networks

Strategic outcomes Capacity building of all stakeholders

Promotion of national policy change

Institutionalisation of participatory processes at local level

Building knowledge of innovative urban management experiences

Key Outputs Partnerships with programmes (Sustainable cities, Safer cities, LA

21, LIFE, PPPUE, Cities Alliance, HIV/AIDS, urban governance

campaign)

Knowledge Repository – over 500 publications from global and re-

gional partners

Tools and guidelines on a range of urban management topics

Innovative local experiences through 120 city consultations in 57

countries

Anchor institutions and local partners networks in each region

(Source: Adapted from a presentation by Françoise Liberherr at a UMP meeting in 2001)

There are now anchor institutions net-

works in each region: The African Network

of Urban Management Institutions

(ANUMI(( ), The Near East and North

Africa (NENA) Urban Forum, the Urban

Resource Centre for Asia and Pacific

(URCAP), and the consortium of UMP-

Latin America and Caribbean anchor in-

stitutions. They are now responsible for

ensuring that urban management and ca-

pacity building activities are sustained be-

yond the life of the UMP. The challenge

for the anchor institution networks is to

transcend beyond their programmatic

origin, and get recognized on their own

merit.

Outcomes and impactsAs a first major global urban programme,

the UMP has influenced global discussions

on urban issues and is instrumental in

promoting many new urban programmes.

Though its influence on urban policy at

national level can not be easily ascertained,

it has been instrumental in promoting di-

alogue among cities and national govern-

ments on a range of issues. By involving

local partners and anchor institutions, it

has also provided a platform for engage-

ment of a range of actors in the urban

development process. But above all, the

UMP is recognised as a major repository

of urban knowledge.

While the principal focus of the UMP

was on promoting participatory process-

es, it was weak when it came to measuring

the impacts of these participatory proc-

esses on the performance of local author-

ities and on the well-being of the poor.

The follow-up to UMP city consultations

have also been weak. The city consulta-

tions were meant to ‘change the way lo-

cal authorities do their business’. But this

has not always happened. By its design,

UMP partners were unable to remain en-

gaged with the same city for a long peri-

od of time. It was therefore difficult to

assess the impact of UMP city consulta-

tions in cities. The participatory nature

of consultations often resulted in ambi-

tious plans, but there was no investment

follow-up to ensure that these plans were

implemented.

Recognising these shortcomings,

in the final years of the UMP, a pro-

gramme on localising the Millennium

Development Goals was drawn up, be-

cause the targets of the MDGs provide

universally accepted measures of so-

cial development. A few UMP partners

and institutions have begun to use the

MDGs as a framework for city consul-

tations. It is expected that these consul-

tations will be able to establish the link

between improved local governance and

the MDG targets at local level.

Dinesh Mehta is Coordinator of the Urban

Management Programme at UN-HABITAT.

8 Habitat Debate December 2005Forum

Two decades of Urban ManagementBy Daniel Biau

The UMP was initiated in at

Istanbul, 10 years after the first Habitat

conference, and a decade before Habitat

II. Its launch marked an important step in

the evolution of international thinking on

urban development.

In 1976, at Vancouver, the world dis-

covered slums and squatter settlements,

the problems of rapid urbanization in the

South, as well as the serious limitations of

urban planning. The international com-

munity also discovered the first urban

projects, sites and services and settlements

upgrading schemes. This project-approach,

based on the implementation of well-de-

fined physical projects, prevailed from

1976 to 1986, while master planning dis-

appeared progressively from the priorities

of developing countries.

Between 1982 and 1986, a new concept

of urban management emerged. The idea

was to replace long-term physical planning,

which had no real impact on city devel-

opment, with daily action-oriented urban

management, integrating both physical

and financial parameters. The other goal

was to insert discrete projects within a

framework of overall city management.

However, the approach remained secto-

ral, and UMP-Phase 1 addressed three are-

as, revealing still a technical understanding

of urban challenges – finance, land and in-

frastructure – as key components of the

urban development process. In addition,

UMP-Phase 1 tried to influence central

governments more than local authorities.

Urban management was replacing master

planning, but municipal development was

not yet on the agenda.

One of the discoveries of this first phase

was precisely to highlight the potential

role of local governments in urban man-

agement. The second phase of UMP went

further, by directly supporting decentral-

ization processes in various developing

countries.

The UMP-thematic focus evolved in

parallel, as Phase 2 incorporated two mul-

tisectoral objectives of urban policy: en-

vironmental management and poverty

reduction. These two objectives became

also top priorities of multilateral and bi-

lateral support agencies, as well as of the

Habitat Agenda adopted in Istanbul in

June 1996.

From the thematic point of view, UMP-

Phase 2 has combined the sectoral ap-

proach of the 1980s with the integrated

approach of the 1990s.

This transition led to a structuring of

Phase 3 around three objectives: protect-

ing the environment, reducing poverty

and improving governance, which are all

multisectoral.

The importance given to urban govern-

ance reflects a major step towards a bet-

ter understanding of urban problems and

also offers a direction for their resolution.

The concept of good or sound governance

– defined as a system of government that

is participatory, transparent, equitable and

effective – refers to the political dimension

of urban management. Sound governance

requires the combination of urban man-

agement and local democracy. It emerged

in the early 1990s as the new paradigm in

the urban development arena.

This is where we stood in 1996. From

planning to management, from manage-

ment to governance, from central govern-

ment to local authorities, from technocracy

to partnerships, from large infrastructure

to sustainable development, UMP was at

the heart of many debates on urban devel-

opment during the 1986-1996 decade.

During its third phase (1997-2001),

the UMP tried to build adequate regional

capacities to implement these new policies

in developing cities. Having established

four regional offices, the UMP devel-

oped an institutional anchoring strategy

through which it built the capacities of a

number of national and regional institutes

which became centres of excellence in ur-

ban management (see articles). This was a

difficult process as it was going against the

well-established approach whereby exper-

tise comes systematically from the North.

In fact this exercise had to be extended

into a fourth phase (2002-2005).

A most interesting dimension of

the last decade was the promotion of

city consultations as a means to trans-

late good urban governance into reality.

Invented by the UMP and its twin sister,

the Sustainable Cities Programme, city

consultations are a practical way to in-

volve stakeholders in urban planning and

management, i.e. to define common pri-

orities, agree on responsibilities and in-

itiate concrete actions. More than 100

cities, helped by UMP, adopted this ap-

proach which has become an interna-

tional standard.

While city consultations are essential at

the planning stage, they have to be com-

plemented by follow-up mechanisms at

the implementation stage. This may have

been the weakness of UMP, connected to

the persistent weakness of municipal fi-

nance systems in many developing coun-

tries. The programme has identified some

promising options such as city communi-

ty challenge funds and participatory budg-

eting, but a lot remains to be done in this

area. In fact, after 20 years, we are back

to this crucial issue of urban finance, the

stumbling block of urban management

that the World Bank has not been able to

fix in spite of billions of US dollars of capi-

tal assistance (see article page 5 by Michael

Cohen).

Finally, we should emphasize an im-

portant result of the UMP, which is to

have introduced urban poverty and ur-

ban governance into the mainstream of

UN-HABITAT activities. The Global

Campaign on Urban Governance,

launched during UMP-Phase 3, has been

derived directly from the UMP experience.

And the UMP has worked closely with

UN-HABITAT Regional Offices to pro-

mote City Development Strategies and

Regional networks of urban experts.

The UMP has been a useful think-tank

and a broad network of experts. It has re-

newed urban planning approaches and

built new capacities in the developing

world.

Three global coordinators played an

important role to ensure its success: Emiel

Wegelin (1994-1996), Paul Taylor (1997-

1999) and Dinesh Mehta (2000-2005)

managed the programme in a highly pro-

fessional and efficient way. Their contribu-

tions must be publicly recognized.

Daniel Biau is Director of u UN-HABITAT’s

Regional and Technical Cooperation

Division.

The UMP has been a useful P

think-tank and a broad

network of experts.

9Habitat Debate December 2005 Forum

One of the most remarkable trends

in the recent history of development

cooperation is the process of bringing glo-

bal structures to respond to local needs

and assets. In its 60th year, the UN as a

whole is no longer a club of central gov-

ernments but is increasingly a convener

and facilitator of genuine demands com-

ing from all societal actors.

The history of the Urban Management

Programme (UMP) thus reflects the his-

tory of development cooperation. The

United Nations Development Programme

is proud to have started UMP and sup-

ported it in all four phases of its existence.

It is important to remark that our sup-

port has been changing in accordance

with changes within the UNDP – from a

purely funding in Phase 1 from 1986 to

1991, to funding and monitoring between

1990 and 1996 in Phases 2 and 3, to a ful-

ly fledged substantive partner from 1997

to 2005 in Phase 4.

UNDP drove the process of chang-

ing the executing agency arrangements

from the World Bank in Phase 1 to

UN-HABITAT in view of technical coop-

eration with UN-HABITAT at the country

level, while the World Bank remained as a

global partner.

UNDP was also instrumental in the

establishment of Regional UMP Offices

in Africa, the Arab States, Asia and Latin

America, while UN-HABITAT prepared

the format.

In its role as Chair of the Programme

Review Committee, UNDP contributed

not only in terms of substantive monitor-

ing, but also in transparent follow-up and

resource mobilization from donors. For

their part, the donors were not only finan-

cial contributors, but also active substan-

tive partners and long-term colleagues.

The flexibility and openness of UMP

partners was an important factor in es-

tablishing a smooth thematic transition

from one phase to the next. From the

purely technical concerns with munic-

ipal finance and land-use management

in the early 1990s, to state-of-the-art

participatory approaches in the new

Millennium, UMP has uncovered new

thematic arenas for global cooperation

and left a legacy of lessons learned and

concrete partnerships.

These included breaking new ground in

urban governance and HIV/AIDS in cit-

ies and towns. Many UNDP programmes

provided inputs and have learned from

UMP: The Local Initiative Facility for

the Urban Environment, and the Public-

Private Partnerships Programme for

the Urban Environment are examples.

UNDP, through the UMP, contributed

to UN-HABITAT’s very successful urban

governance campaign. The UNDP pol-

icy paper on Governance for Sustainable

Human Development, approved by thett

UNDP Executive Board in 1996, was

mainstreamed through various compo-

nents of the Programme. And, not least,

the fact that UMP continues spontane-

ously as a relevant network of institutions

based in the regions.

At the country level, the network of

UNDP Country Offices helped provide

institutional and even financial support to-

wards scaling-up and mainstreaming some

of the activities pioneered by the UMP.

UNDP was very concerned to develop the

City Consultation methodology with lo-

cal follow-up funding and action to ensure

implementation at the local level. In this

regard, the role of anchor institutions in

providing local knowledge and action to

the global network was fundamental.

There is no question that the UMP suc-

ceeded because of the relative strength of

each of the three main partners – the World

Bank in terms of its original research capa-

bilities, UN-HABITAT as the operational

arm and lead agency in the UN in this sec-

tor, and UNDP as the programme coordi-

nator and substantive monitor.

G.Shabbir Cheema is Principal

Adviser and Programme Director, UN

Department of Economic and Social

Affairs (UNDESA). Jonas Rabinovitch

is Programme Adviser, Capacity 2015,

and Senior Policy Adviser for Urban

Development and Rural-ll Urban Relations,

UNDP. Robertson Work is Principal k

Policy Advisor, Decentralised Governance,

UNDP.

UNDP support to the Urban Management Programme – connecting global actors to local realities

By G. Shabbir Cheema, Jonas Rabinovitch and Robertson Work

Global partnership lessons learned through the UMPTo be effective, partnerships should be outcome-oriented.

2 Effective global programmes should combine local, national, regional and global activities.

3 Participatory processes like the City Consultation are essential to engage lo-cal actors in their cities and towns. Direct targeting of the urban poor, wom-en and the degraded environment was essential to the programme’s impact.

4 On-going analysis and documentation of experience provide an important knowledge management component that contributes to scale-up global co-operation at the local level. Combining research and action in an ongoing in-terplay enhanced both knowledge creation and effective implementation.

5 The establishment of networks at the national and regional levels is an im-portant means to connect global programmes with local realities.

6 The network of anchor and partner institutions helped consolidate lessons learned at the local level and enhanced the sustainability of the programme.

-stantive partners provided transparency and a true sense of programme ownership.

8 The institution of regular Programme Review Committee meetings en-hanced transparent monitoring, participation and sustainability.

development cooperation while following major substantive developments in

10 Challenges at the local level are integrated. The ability to provide integrated solutions combining poverty, environment and governance concerns, among others, gave the UMP a realistic track record in handling development chal-lenges at the local level.

10 Habitat Debate December 2005Forum

The UMP has a future on its ownBy Stig Egnell

The Swedish International Develop-

ment Cooperation Agency (Sida)

has supported the Urban Management

Programme (UMP) for many reasons.

Sida found that its general and themat-

ic focus corresponded closely to Sweden’s

own development priorities on problems

of poverty reduction, good governance,

environmental concern, gender equality

and the fight against HIV/AIDS.

A plus factor was the Programme’s flex-

ibility and adaptability. The UMP has

evolved from its technical beginnings into

a goal and process oriented programme.

Another positive factor was the logical de-

centralisation process of the Programme

from global to regional structures, down

to the local municipal level. The focus on

partnerships and networking was also no-

table – especially the development of re-

gional and national anchoring institutions

as a means of leveraging and sustainabili-

ty, as well as the emphasis on knowledge

management and dissemination of lessons

learned. Finally, there was an appeal in the

innovative transparent governance struc-

ture, based on the Programme Review

Committee, with active participation of

donors and multilateral partners. It ena-

bled donors not only to be considered as

financial sources, but as a resource for de-

veloping experience and as a channel for

communicating that experience to others

engaged in development.

As a major global programme running

for nearly two decades, the UMP is credit-

ed with putting urban issues on the inter-

national agenda, and influencing policies

at regional and national level. Indeed, the

UMP was one of the very first programmes

to focus the urban challenge. Its role at the

frontline here has gained increasing recog-

nition as testified by the strong demand

for UMP publications which number

more than 500 titles.

The UMP´s impact is clearly evident in

the many cities where the Programme has

been active and its ideas adopted.

A major contribution of the UMP is

the introduction of city consultations

as a means of participatory governance

including a wide group of stakehold-

ers. Other programmes have also adopt-

ed this methodology. Not the least, the

Programme has been instrumental in ad-

vocating good governance as a prerequi-

site for poverty reduction.

For the future, a strong focus on the

local and community level should be

maintained and strengthened. To achieve

impact on the ground, and indeed at-

tain the Millennium Development Goals

(MDGs), the action plans devised through

the city consultation process have to be

implemented.

Many international agencies have be-

gun to use the MDGs as a development

framework for assistance. The number of

people living in slums and squatter settle-

ments is increasing and putting an added

burden on urban infrastructure. Therefore,

the achievement of MDGs in urban are-

as may not only be the most difficult to

achieve, but also the most urgently needed.

The importance of including and empow-

ering the urban poor and other stakehold-

ers to co-operate with capacitated local

governments in this process is obvious.

The UMP’s investments over a long pe-

riod have resulted in a valuable capital for

improving living conditions of the urban

poor. In summary, this capital includes:

A wealth of knowledge in the form

of lessons learned, tools and guide-

lines on urban management in de-

veloping countries.

An innovative methodology in the

form of participatory pro-poor city

consultations carried out in many

cities and countries.

A network of regional anchor insti-

tutions and many national or local

partner institutions.

This capital can be utilised to help ”lo-

calizing” the MDGs. The city consultation

process offers a means for local authorities

and stakeholders to take ownership of the

MDG process at local level.

Although the UMP will cease to be a

UN programme this year, the anchor in-

stitutions and networks are expected to

carry on its work. These now have a very

important role to play in managing and

disseminating the Programme’s wealth of

knowledge. The regional structures are

also interesting potential executing part-

ners for other initiatives. Many donors

are changing their funding modalities. In

Sida’s case, the main resources are chan-

nelled via regional funds.

However, the four regional net-

works might still be fragile. It is there-

fore important that they remain able

to rely on the advice and assistance of

UN-HABITAT.

Stig Egnell, is a Consulting Architect

Planner and Urban Advisor to Sida. He has

been engaged in the UMP since 1995.

Bringing the MDGs to places like this slum on the outskirts of Nouakchott, Mauritania has been a goal of the UMP and donors like Sida. Photo © Giacomo Pirozzi / PANOS

11Habitat Debate December 2005 Forum

Objectives Progress-

ments in developing countries for improved prac-tices of pro-poor participatory urban governance,including (a) adoption of improved and coherentpro-poor (urban poverty reduction) policies and (b)improved legislative and regulatory frameworks aimed at poverty reduction adopted in cities partici-pating in pro-poor consultations.

Number of cities carrying out pro-poor cityconsultations

120 city consultation processes + 7CDS

1.2. Pro-poor action plans/strategies resulting from thecity and country consultations developed, approved and implemented.

Number of Action Plans where key componentsare implemented through internal and external resources and stakeholder participation.

48 cities engaged in the implementa-tion of action plans

1.3. City consultation activities resulting in a scaling-up of territorial, policy, pro-poor participation, gender and poverty reduction programmes in response tourban management challenges

Scaling-up of City Consultation interventionsdocumented and disseminated.

8 cases of scaling up of CCinterventions

2. Capacities of regional anchor institutions consolidated

2.1. Strengthened capacity of anchor institutions to im-plement and scale up action plans/ city develop-ment strategies derived through city consultation processes in selected cities.

Capacity building programme for regional anchor institutions integrated in cooperation agreements with regional anchor institutions / local partners

15 training activities recorded Institutional development plans pre-pared by anchor institutions

Training and capacity-building effortsare taking place in regional centres.

2.2. Establishment of knowledge management systemsin anchor institutions.

Number of training manuals, tool-kits, lessonslearned publications, best practices publications and related KM products developed per region per year

Overall, nearly 400 reports and docu-ments published

City consultation tools developed and other KM materials and strate-gies underway in all regions. Frequentto steady publication output. Globalnewsletter a regular output.

2.3. Anchor institutions with adequate capacity to advo-

in pro-poor urban governance and support coun-tries within the region to formulate, develop, and implement policies and programmes of action on urban management.

Number of regional networks and forums thatanchor institutions are actively involved with.

Frequent involvement in regional net-works and forums. Examples includeAfricities, Asia Urban Forum, Social fo-rum in LAC and NENA forum.

3. Consolidate UMP knowledge management systems with complementary global knowledge management initiatives

3.1. A global and regional network of information, ex-perts, practitioners and policy makers for poli-cy development, best practices/lessons learnedexchange and knowledge management on pro-poor participatory urban governance and urban management.

Global and Regional web sites operational, fre-quently used and updated every two months

Database containing all city consultation experi-ences, anchor institution documents, and UMP publications.

4 regional and 1 global website active and regularly updated.

Global database in UMP publication no 27

3.2. Analysis and synthesis of lessons learnt from expe-rience and capacity building materials in pro-poor participatory urban governance for local authori-ties, municipal networks and regional associations.Produced and disseminated.

Knowledge management tool and training manu-al produced and disseminated at the global level

Activities carried out by city/country networksand organizations to disseminate the city consul-tation experience

Toolkit on Participatory Planning pro-duced through UN-HABITAT govern-ance campaign

Evaluation report of city consultation published

-icies of External Support Agencies and enhanced global awareness of urban management issues.

Results of one global seminar and four regional seminars disseminated to stakeholders

Number of media reports at global, nation-al and local level per year, covering UrbanManagement activities

UMP Phase 3 report prepared and dis-seminated.

Media reports of city consultation re-ported at PRC

4. Mainstreaming Gender in Urban Management

4.1. Gender mainstreamed into all UMP programmeand projects and reporting activities.

Number of products, including city consultations documentation, capacity building tools, training manuals and policy papers, where gender analy-sis/impact dimension has been integrated

20 products with clear gender dimen-sion

Gender focus in 7 CCs. LAC and Asia Regional Gender competition. All HIV/

gender.

Compiled by Michael Parkes, Senior Urban Advisor to DfID, UK

Strengthening local governance, poverty reduction, and environmental improvementThe table below gives an accurate reflection of the UMP’s achievements as seen from the vantage point of the Department for International

Development of the United Kingdom.

12 Habitat Debate December 2005Regional

Better Urban Management in AsiaBy Nathaniel von Einsiedel

When UN-HABITAT’s invited me WWinWW to join the Urban Manage-

ment Programme, little did I expect that

I’d be spending the next 13 years with one

of the most professionally fulfilling experi-

ences of my life. It was a total learning ex-

perience, starting with my being engaged

as Task Manager for Capacity Building

and subsequently as Regional Coordinator

for Asia-Pacific.

There had never been a technical coop-

eration programme like the UMP before.

Its city consultation approach was unique,

and has been widely documented. What I

would like to share are three lessons that

stand out in my mind – it was demand-

driven, participatory, and valued Local

Partner Institutions (LPIs).

I found being demand-driven to be dif-ff

ficult when introducing more effective ur-

ban management practices to city mayors

and managers who do not exactly know

what to ‘demand’. Thus with the help of

the Asia Regional Panel of Experts, we de-

veloped a “menu” of technical assistance

topics from which mayors or city manag-

ers could choose the support they needed.

This helped elicit the request for technical

support, but there were a number of cas-

es where the menu item chosen did not

really reflect the most critical need, requir-

ing major redirection midway through the

consultation process.

Phase 1 of the UMP produced many

publications, but these were largely too

technical for the typical Asian mayor or ur-

ban manager. I tried to help by producing

the UMP-Asia Occasional Paper, Primer on

Urban Management. But our budget did

not allow us to print this in languages other

than English. In Asia, knowledge of English

is extremely limited especially in developing

countries.

On the participatory approach, it was

when we launched the city consultations

in China and Vietnam that I realized the

cultural difference in how the terms ‘stake-

holders’ and ‘citizen participation’ are used

or understood. It was wrong to assume that

the Chinese and Vietnamese mayors under-

stood these terms as I did. They explained

that their People’s Committees (PCs) repre-

sented the city stakeholders, and thus there

was no need to organize new groups. I was

not sure how representative the PCs were,

but I gave them the benefit of the doubt,

and it seemed to work well, at least in their

particular circumstances.

It was similar with the term ‘citizen par-

ticipation,’ which I’ve realized is culturally

contextual. How it is understood and prac-

ticed in the industrialized world compared

to the developing world is very different.

In Asia, hardly anyone attends a town hall

meeting. The urban poor particularly do

not participate in formal public hearings. In

promoting the UMP’s participatory proc-

ess, we tended to impose our own way of

thinking instead of adapting this to the lo-

cal cultural context. We pushed the Western

norms of participation without first deter-

mining the local approaches to achieving

consensus. We should have devoted more

time and effort to studying the local culture

before launching city consultations.

On the final lesson, Local Partner Institutions were crucial too to the success

of every city consultation. With the diver-

sity of Asia’s cultures, it is impossible for an

outsider to get effective urban management

accepted without any local support. Not

only does the LPI speak the local language,

it also has knowledge of local decision-mak-

ing processes, including the political dy-yy

namics underlying it.

The UMP consultation process invaria-

bly involves change. This inevitably gener-

ates sensitivities if not outright objection

from those affected, especially those in posi-

tions of power. Thus, the LPIs contribution

in dealing with those obstacles is indispen-

sable. Its better “feel” of the local dynamics

is crucial to forging consensus. Often, we

tend to give too much weight to the tech-

nical or substantive qualities of change

agents, rather than their process skills in fa-

cilitating dialogue, and in getting change

considered accepted, implemented and

institutionalized.

However, there is an obstacle that needs

to be overcome. It is the tendency among

some Asian mayors, particularly those in

least developed countries, to favor expa-

triate consultants over local experts. These

mayors seem to believe that local experts are

not ‘good enough’, that the farther away an

expert comes from, the better his or her ex-

pertise. As we know, this is not true, but it

remains an obstacle.

Nathaniel von Einsiedel was the UMP’s

Asia-Pacific Regional Coordinator.

UMP-Asia Local partner InstitutionsCountry RPI/LPI Contact

1. Bangladesh Bangladesh Center for AdvancedStudies (BCAS)

Email: [email protected]: www.bcas.net

2. Cambodia Gender and Development for Cambodia (GAD/C)

Email: [email protected]

3. China Shenyang Environmental Protection

(SEPFFIO)

4. India Citizens Voluntary Initiative for theCity (CIVIC Bangalore)


Administrative Support College of India (ASCI)


5. Indonesia Pt. Wiswakharman Email: [email protected]

7. Nepal Lumanti Support Group Email: [email protected]

Municipal Association of Nepal(MuAN)

E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.muannepal.org

8. Philippines VEDCOR Philippines (Ventures and Entrepreneurship Development Center in the Orient, Inc.)


9. Sri Lanka SEVANATHA Urban Research Centre


10. Thailand Thailand Environment Institute (TEI) Email: [email protected]

11. Vietnam Urbnet-Vietnam Email: [email protected]@hn.vnn.vn

Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Bangkok, Thailand – Dr. Girija Shrestha [email protected]: http://www.serd.ait.ac.th/ump/ All India Institute of Local Self Government (AIILSG), Mumbai, India [email protected]

13Habitat Debate December 2005 Regional

Giving women a voice in Urban Governance – Experiences from UMP-AsiaBy Girija Shrestha and Ranjith Perera

It is common knowledge that wom-

en’s participation in public decision-

making is minimal compared to that of

men. In a pattern prevalent in most gov-

ernment and local administrative sectors

in the Asia-Pacific region, women consti-

tute only 6 percent of mayors and 18 per-

cent of city councillors.

This under-representation means that

the needs and priorities of women, espe-

cially those living in urban poverty, are ex-

cluded from the decision-making process

at every level and thus from the develop-

ment process.


sought to redress this by using the city

consultation system to solicit the concerns

of women and bring them into the deci-

sion, planning and implementation phas-

es of city development.

The UMP led by anchor institu-

tions in the region, is now called the

Urban Resource Network for Asia Pacific

(URNAP). The Bangkok-based Asian

Institute of Technology serves as a regional

secretariat of URNAP, while the All India

Institute of Local Self Government is a sub

regional secretariat. Using available limit-

ed resources, it strives for gender sensi-

tive city consultations, and seeks to ensure

that city-level government officers under-

stand the concerns and needs of women. It

has also been conducting workshops and

seminars to share knowledge and even ar-

ranged a local government contest on gen-

der sensitivity.

For example, it held a series of ur-

ban poverty reduction seminars focused

on the needs of women in Phnom Penh,

Vientiane, New Delhi, and Lalitpur, Nepal

– each different in socio-economic terms

and the way it is administered. The con-

sultations covered shelter, capacity build-

ing for women in poverty, HIV/AIDS and

other key problems.

The UMP intervention in Delhi, has

had a visible impact on the status of slum

women, who are now much more aware

and better informed of their position and

status on land tenure and the right to shel-

ter. They are also in a better position to ne-

gotiate for their demands of basic services

and land tenure with the authorities. At a

household level, being engaged in micro-

credit activities, women have more bar-

gaining power and more say at home.

Similarly, in Lalitpur, self-help groups

were formed and women’s leadership was

developed. The consultation approach

gave these slum dwellers confidence that

they have the potential to be the biggest

agent of change.

The consultation in Vientiane showed

that bringing women into the implemen-

tation of infrastructure development is

pivotal to the success of any given proj-

ect, and the UMP gender consultation

has expanded from 3 to 40 villages with

assistance of Asian Development Bank

funding.

Despite the differences between the

cities, a common approach was adopt-

ed to ensure better commitment of gen-

der needs at the leadership level, to bring

more women representatives into the pro-

cess, encourage reporting that takes wom-

en’s concerns into account, and raising

awareness so that gender sensitive action

plans are implemented.

The consultations found that gender

awareness does not come naturally to pro-

fessionals and decision-makers whether

they are men or women, and that chang-

es in organizational culture are required. It

was also found that inclusive partnerships

in urban governance must also take into

account the obstacles to women’s involve-

ment in public life, such as a lack of confi-

dence or skills, and the burden of multiple

responsibilities.

The experiences of the UMP have

shown that participation in the deci-

sion-making body is the first step to meet

gender equality. The capacity building ac-

tivities can be conducted in parallel to it to

make them more efficient and confident

as well as sustainable.

Women leaders said the UMP consul-

tations had helped lead to a change for the

better in their social status, encouraged

more women to join in, increased confi-

dence, raised their economic empower-

ment and given them a stronger voice in

their communities and their homes.

UMP evidence clearly shows that a proj-

ect designed with an understanding of the

needs of disadvantaged people not only im-

proves their living conditions but also rais-

es their self-esteem and self-confidence.

Girija Shrestha and Ranjith Perera are

faculty members of the Asian Institute of

Technology coordinating UMP activities in

the region.


Cairo, home of a UMP anchor institution in the Middle East. Photo © Mark Henley / PANOS

The active partners of the Urban

Management Programme in the Arab

States Region conducted a wide range of

city consultations on land management,

gender, governance, and HIV/AIDS. These

activities built new awareness, opening

the debate on problems that were either

neglected or deemed taboo. In some cases,

they influenced policy. UMP implementa-

tion in the region was initially undertaken

by a number of institutions and individ-

uals. To ensure sustainability, these insti-

tutions created a regional network called

the Near East and North Africa (NENA)

Urban Forum. The members today in-

clude the institutions such as EQI, Egypt;

FUM, Morocco, JUM, Jordan; LEDA,

Lebanon; and FNVT, Tunis in association

with UN-HABITAT’s Regional Office for

Africa and the Arab States.

In the Arab States, the UMP has had

a unique approach differing from oth-

er regions – the establishment of a me-

dia network, the Arab Media Forum on

Environment and Development. It has

played an influential role in raising the

profile of urban management among or-

dinary people all the way up to govern-

ment level.

Through the years, the UMP success-

fully helped Arab cities and national

governments implement pro-poor par-

ticipatory urban governance through

the city consultation process. This also

helped strengthen the capacities of re-

gional and national anchoring insti-

tutions. Knowledge management was

taken forward through the establish-

ment of a web site, while the AMFED

media network has championed advo-

cacy and awareness building across the

region. Addressing the challenges of gen-

der mainstreaming and HIV/AIDS has

also achieved notable progress.

Future UMP plans in the region have

been developed through a consultative

process including all the anchor institu-

tions under the coordination of NENA.

Good local governance was the fo-

cus of the first regional programme.

UN-HABITAT Arabic language train-

ing materials were used Egypt, Jordan,

Morocco, the occupied Palestinian territo-

ries and Somalia with great success. The

goal was to elevate local governance to the

aspired inclusiveness, transparency, part-

nership, equitability, and sound local pol-

icy development and decision-making.

The goals are achieved through leadership

training for councilors and NGOs and

other local development partners.

Gender was identified as the second

programme, an area still in need of con-

certed efforts in the region to arrive at

more equitable governance and to im-

prove the status of women as a main con-

stituency of the urban scene. Building on

the UMP experience in this field where

a number of workshops have already

been successfully implemented, FNVT

of Tunisia and LEDA of Lebanon haveA

developed a new programme to address

gender in local development. Persistent

efforts are needed to achieve policy and

tangible change in the male-dominated

politics of the region.

The third programme focuses on mi-

cro credit schemes to enable the poor to

improve productivity and reduce the eco-

nomic divide in the region. This concept

is built on the experience gained in Egypt

where a bank with branch offices country-

wide has taken the lead in making micro

credit available to poor people. High re-

payment rates are an encouraging sign for

replication of this experience.

Mohamed El Sioufi is Senior Human

Settlements Officer at UN-HABITAT.TT

The Urban Management Programme in the Arab States

By Mohamed El Sioufi

The Near East and North Africa Urban Forum (NENA) and its anchor institutionsNENA’s extensive professional networkacts as the brains of the three-year oldorganisation based in Morocco and cov-ering six other countries – Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey.NENA’s raison d’être is threefold: identi-fying the main urban development issues

makers, together with development and promotion of innovative solutions. Thenetwork is also instrumental in the shar-ing of experiences, best practices and in-formation between members. It maintains dialogue with ordinary citizens through extensive media partnerships that enableit to raise awareness and stimulate civ-ic engagement. It also actively engaged with multilateral and bilateral aid institu-tions such as the World Bank, USAID), non-governmental regional organisa-tions like the Centre for the Environment and Development for the Arab Region and Europe, and global associations like the Cities Alliance and the InternationalUrban Development Association. Its agenda is in line with the MillenniumDevelopment Goals. Priorities includemainstreaming of gender issues in local policies, poverty reduction, governanceand sustainable development. Website: http://www.umpasr.org

Forum Urbain Maroc, Rabat, Morocco, <[email protected]>

Environmental Quality International (EQI), Cairo, <[email protected]>

Centre for Environment andDevelopment for Arab Region and Europe (CEDARE), Cairo, <[email protected]>

Fédération Nationale des Villes Tunisiennes (FNVT), Tunis, <[email protected]>

Housing and Urban DevelopmentCorporation (HUDC), Amman [email protected] http://www.umpasr.org


Democratic urban management in Latin America and the CaribbeanBy Rocío Lombera


in Latin America and the Caribbean

(UMP-LAC) has served as the ultimate

paradigm developing major new networks

between nations, regions, countries and

cities. Beyond those, what has really mat-

tered is the predominant role of the people,

their communities and various grassroots

groups as they have engaged in the com-

mon endeavour of solving major problems

confronting them at the local level.

In effect, this means that peoples and

governments have been implementing

the UN vision, from the local to the glo-

bal level, anchored as they are in the ter-

ritorial realities of our Latin America, yet

together building a better world for all re-

gardless of gender. This stands as the main

UMP achievement in Latin America and

the Caribbean.

The UMP was innovative insofar as im-

plementation was “anchored” in regions

around the world and based on the joint

workings of the various programmes con-

ducted by the UN system – and particular-

ly by UNDP and UN-HABITAT. However,

nowhere has the global-ranging UMP been

deployed more thoroughly and extensively

than in Latin America and the Caribbean. A

strategic alliance has been built and operat-

ed, with Mr. Yves Cabannes as Coordinator,

with a selected group of institutions. These

represent civil society and those local au-

thorities, the so-called Regional Anchor

Institutions (RAIs). During its seven years

so far, this alliance has brought together

practically all the major urban management

stakeholders in the region.

This “anchoring” has taken place at var-

ious levels.

At regional level, social-technical,

methodological and educational support

has been provided by RAIs with links

to regional networks whose main stra-

tegic themes are similar to those of the

UMP. Those RAIs include Agora XXI

and Cearah-Periferia (Brazil), Ciudad

and IULA-Celcadel (Ecuador), Copevi

(Mexico), Fedevivienda (Colombia) and

IPES (Peru).

Meanwhile, the Regional Consultative

Forum has brought together regional bod-

ies representing various sectors that pursue

UMP-type objectives, such as grassroots

campaign groups, NGO and local author-

ity networks, universities, government de-

partments in charge

of housing and urban

development as well

as Parliamentarians

for Habitat. The

Forum has been play-

ing a more political,

two-pronged kind of

role than the RAIs:

analysing and recom-

mending those poli-

cies most conducive

to deployment of the

Programme; and ar-

ticulating the desires

and compromises em-

anating from Forum

members while fa-

vouring participative

governance, sustain-

able environmental

policies as well as fair and inclusive urban

management – all of this in the face of ris-

ing poverty and social inequality.

At the national and local levels, pro-

gramme development has been anchored

in an endless string of “local associates”

from local authorities, grassroots cam-

paign groups and organisations, to NGOs,

universities and others dealing with urban

problems.

Every stakeholder involved has effec-

tively played a relevant role in the deploy-

ment of UMP-LAC, either as a “resource

city”, a “city of reference”, an “associate

city”, an “associate institution” or a “tech-

nical associate”. Every stakeholder has set

examples and learned from one another. In

the process, they have built a vast network

for the management of regional knowl-

edge based on the sharing and systematic

assessment of experiences, hands-on train-

ing, and dissemination through the widest

possible range of media and formats.

This is the background against which

UMP-LAC has been making headway,

and it is therefore appropriate that it ac-

tivities now continue through the two re-

gional bodies, the International Urban

Management Centre (CIGU) and the

Consortium of Urban Management

Institutions.

We need to regain our capacity and

our ability to govern ourselves in the wid-

er sense of decision-making. This includes

society’s control and alertness over the mo-

mentum it generates, as well as its capaci-

ty to face challenges in a positive manner,

create the conditions for common pro-

posals, generate consensus, and put into

practice a genuinely democratic social and

institutional ethic. Far from being an add-

on luxury for the political class, this is a

matter of survival for humankind, in view

of the explosive nature of the social and

environmental conditions in which we

live in today.

As the builders of UMP-LAC, this is

what we have learned. This is our legacy.

Ms. Rocío Lombera is Director and

Chairperson of the Centro Operacional

Anchor Institutions in Latin America and the CaribbeanUrban Resource Centre for Latin America and the Caribbean, [email protected], Website:http://www.pgualc.org

Centro de Capacitación y Desarrollode los Gobiernos Locales (IULA-CELCADEL) <[email protected]>

org.co

Instituto de Promocion de la Economica Social (IPES) <[email protected]>

Centro Operacional de Vivienda y Poblamiento (COPEVI), Mexico <[email protected]>

Agora XXI <[email protected]>

Website:http://www.pgualc.org

Reducing urban poverty in places like this rundown tenement building in the heart of Mexico City is major goal of the UMP. Photo © Aubrey Wade / PANOS

16 Habitat Debate December 2005Case study

Making a difference for poor people — new low income housing in Belem. Photo © UN-HABITAT

City consultations with the urban poor in Belem, Brazil.

Belem on Brazil’s north coast is the

largest city in the Brazilian Amazon

with a working population of 600,000

inhabitants. However, 70 percent of the

population live in conditions of poverty

with 10 percent living on an income less

than US$ 50 per month.

The city is faced with the problem of

urban growth, and land occupation in un-

planned settlements. Most of the immi-

grants live in shacks, and 50 percent of

the population are without sewage sys-

tems, basic infrastructure, hygiene. From

a crime point of view, they live in a con-

stant state of insecurity.

In 1997 the municipality institution-

alized a Participatory Budget for the

city and between 1997-1998 the top-

ics considered were those related to the

problems of basic sanitation and liv-

ing conditions. Many people had set up

shacks along river banks.

A UMP city consultation started in

January 1998 to develop a pilot project

aimed at the design and management of a

river conservation system that would im-

prove the living conditions of families set-

tled in the Mata Fome basin.

The consultation helped local partners

devise a participatory action plan. It in-

cluded a housing credit programme for

the poorest people. But the process ran

into some problems like a lack of resourc-

es, and difficulty in identifying a man-

agement and coordination unit. Some

government organs did not show an in-

creased sense of responsibility.

The action plan provided for road im-

provement in Mata Fome district, better

water and sanitation access, and a “better liv-

ing” programme giving preference to wom-

en. The plan was replicated in other parts of

the city under a participatory method that

supports community participation through

seminars, research and other methods. The

credit fund formed with resources from the

municipality, NGOs and the community

was in 2000 expanded to 300 families.

Although the city consultation helped

raise public awareness of some of the

problems, lessons learned showed that the

local government was predisposed against

the development of participatory manage-

ment in the city. It also showed that the

Urban Management Programme had to

be very well understood by all involved

so as not to raise false hopes. Another les-

son was that the presence of a local partner

such as the UMP-LAC and the existence

of a municipal government receptive to

popular participation enabled the ex-

change of experiences with other cities.

Excerpted by Tom Osanjo from the

UMP publication, “Implementing the

Habitat Agenda”.


The UMP in action – bringing local authorities into the frontline against AIDS in AfricaBy George Matovu

Anchor Institutions in AfricaAfrican Network of Urban Management Institutes (ANUMI), e-mail [email protected]; Website:http://anumi.bnetd.ci

Bureau National d’Etudes Techniquespour le Développement (BNETD) Abidjan, Cote d’ Ivoire [email protected]

Institut Africain de Gestion Urbaine (IAGU) “Oumar Cisse” <[email protected]>

Graduate School of Public andDevelopment Management (P&DM), Johannesburg, South Africa [email protected]

Municipal Development Programme(MDP) Eastern and Southern Africa

[email protected]

Development Policy Centre (DPC), Ibadan, Nigeria [email protected]

In , the Municipal Development

Partnership in Eastern and Southern

Africa (MDP-ESA) became a stand-alone

regional not-profit organisation headquar-

tered in Harare, Zimbabwe. In its quest

for partners, UN-HABITAT’s Urban

Management Programme was a natural

ally in promoting decentralisation and

strengthening the capacity of urban local

authorities.

Through two projects in Malawi and

Mozambique aimed at bringing local au-

thorities into the frontline in the fight

against HIV/AIDS, the MDP-ESA not

raised awareness about HIV/AIDS, but

it has also been recognized a centre of ex-

cellence in Sub-Saharan Africa in tackling

the myriad problems of African cities and

towns.

The two highlights of the UMP HIV/

AIDS partnership with MDP-ESA in

Blantyre, Malawi, and in Manhica,

Mozambique are based on the City

Consultation process whereby every ef-ff

fort is made to engage representatives of

the government, local authorities, the pri-

vate sector, civil society, community groups,

and NGOs on urban governance, urban

poverty reduction, and gender balance with

a view to developing follow-up activities.

The process of consultation emphasis-

es participation and dialogue to establish a

mutual and supportive framework for all

actors. Alongside this goal, is the idea of

enhancing the capacity of local authorities

to build partnerships as a strategy to sup-

port sustainable urban development and

management.

The Blantyre City Assembly (BCA)

HIV and AIDS initiative was implement-

ed between 2002 and 2004.

It was borne out of a 1999-2004 MDP-

ESA programme funded by Finland

through the World Bank on Strengthening

Civic Participation in Municipal

Governance in Malawi, Mozambique,

Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.

The MDP-ESA helped the Blantyre

City Assembly forge a partnership with the

Malawi Association of Local Governments

(MALGA), and the Malawi Congress

of Non- Governmental Organizations

(CONGOMA) to provide leadership and

support in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

The Harare-based SAfAIDS was invited to

help collect and share information from

other countries in the region.

It started with three special training and

awareness seminars. They forged an action

plan that set up a Community HIV/AIDS

Challenge Fund in Malawi and urged the

creation of urban youth centres to provide

awareness and education of HIV/AIDS

problems. The action plan also sought to

lobby for free medical treatment and addi-

tional clinics.

The consultations, culminated in the

launch of the National Chapter of the

Alliance of Mayors Against HIV/AIDS

on 6 November 2003. It has also seen

the city assembly accept the involvement

of civic organisation in municipal budg-

eting, the development of the HIV/AIDS

Prevention and Management Strategy for

Blantyre, the establishment of a resource

centre that provides information on HIV/

AIDS, and civic organisations supported

by SAfAIDS.

Today, there are strong bonds between

the City Assembly and various stakehold-

ers concerned at the spread of HIV/AIDS.

The Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, council-

lors, and the Chief Executive Officer have

openly expressed their commitment and

support for the initiative. The Alliance of

Mayors and Municipal Leaders on HIV/

AIDS in Africa, SAfAIDS, and UNDP

have pledged additional funding and tech-

nical assistance to support Blantyre in its

effort to implement the HIV/AIDS pro-

gramme. The overall impact is visible in

terms of the scope of the responses, and

the emerging behavioural change of the

most vulnerable groups.

Building on the results of Blantyre City

Assembly, MDP-ESA was asked by the

Municipality of Manhica in Mozambique

to help launch a similar project on fight-

ing HIV/AIDS. This too produced an ac-

tion plan for the city. The Mozambique

National Association of Aids Service

Organizations (MoNAASO) helped pro-

vide information, while the Swiss Agency

for Development and Cooperation ex-

pressed interest in providing budgetary

support to Manhica to ensure the success

of the action plan.

Indeed, the Blantyre City Assembly

HIV/AIDS initiative has evolved into an

international best practice tool for improv-

ing municipal responses in fighting HIV/

AIDS. Besides Mozambique, the initia-

tive is being extended to Tanzania, Uganda,

and Zambia.

George Matovu is Regional Director,

MDP-ESA, based in Harare.

There is increasing evidence that lack of adequate shelter has a direct impact on the care of affected persons and prevention of HIV/AIDS. For slum dwell-ers, lack of secure tenure, poor access to basic services, and lack of access to public health care result in improper and infrequent access to anti-retrovi-ral therapy drugs (even when they are supplied at no cost). Slum residents are often unable to adhere to medical regimes because they lack a supportive

issues. HIV/AIDS orphans, street children, particularly young girls, and home-less adults are the most affected, as they are most susceptible to HIV/AIDS pandemic in urban areas. – From the publication, The time to address HIV/AIDS in our cities is Now, UN-HABITAT/UNDP 2002.


Managing biomedical waste in Dakar, SenegalBy Salimata Seck

Adequate medical supplies are alAA -

ready a problem for many develop-

ing countries, but disposal of biomedical

waste is another, more serious matter. A

programme conducted in the Senegalese

capital, Dakar, shows that a sustainable

approach, complete with city consulta-

tions, delivers effective benefits, including

awareness-raising and replication.

The factors behind West Africa’s prob-

lems with biomedical waste stem from

poor infrastructure and poor risk aware-

ness. Due to an absence of sorting at

source, all types of waste get mixed up

together along the whole disposal chain,

from collection to transportation to elim-

ination. Similarly, the risks entailed by bi-

omedical waste remain largely ignored by

all those involved, from governement au-

thorities to healthcare professionals and

the wider public.

This is why in 1998 the African office

of UN-HABITAT’s Urban Management

Programme (UMP) mandated Dakar’s

African Institute for Urban Management

(IAGU) to hold urban consultations on bi-

omedical waste issues in four major West

African cities : Dakar, Bamako (Mali),

Cotonou (Benin), and Ouagadougou

(Burkina Faso). IAGU conducted the

programme in close co-operation with

the African Foundation for Urban

Management (AFUM).

The UMP-IAGU programme focused

on four activities: assessing the situation

through an inclusive, participatory ap-

proach, raising awareness among local

authorities and the public, identifying pri-

ority actions to improve the situation, and

deploying a network of experts.

In all four capitals, IAGU followed up

an environmental assessment with a lo-

cal consultation. The process aimed at

validating the findings and developing ac-

tion plans. Financing and implementation

were steered by monitoring committees

comprised of well-placed representatives

from municipal authorities, the public,

the business sector and civil society.

The more innovative aspect of the

UMP-IAGU programme was a region-

wide consultation which in late 1999

brought together in Dakar all the mem-

bers of the AFUM governing council.

These included a number of African may-

ors whose cities were formally outside

the scope of the programme. The meet-

ing also drew a wide range of munici-

pal officers, local elected representatives,

healthcare experts, utility profession-

als and scholars, together with experts

from UNDP, the secretariat of the 1989

Basel Convention on Hazardous Wastes,

the WHO African office and aid agency

executives.

This wealth of discussion found its prac-

tical outcome in the Dakar Declaration

whereby West African mayors committed

themselves to sustainable management of

biomedical waste. The mayors also high-

lighted the need for demonstration pro-

grammes in the post-consultation phase in

order to sustain community support and

facilitate replication across the whole of

Africa.

The post-consultation phase ended in

2000 as the demonstration projects in

Bamako, Cotonou and Dakar came on

stream. An awareness-raising film that

had been shown at the Dakar meeting

was broadcast on two major TV channels

and a specialist handbook published (in

French). In the meantime, in 1999 and

as an offshoot of the programme, the

secretariat of the Basel Convention and

the Government of Senegal designated

IAGU as the anchor institution for the

International Centre for Training and

Technology Transfer on Hazardous Waste.

The centre is sponsored by 22 African

countries and has since then been man-

dated by WHO and Switzerland’s Ecole

Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne to

assist action plans in major African cities.

The UMP-IAGU programme has suc-

ceeded beyond the significant recent

improvement in biomedical waste man-

agement in Dakar and other cities in

Senegal. It has raised awareness in both

central and local governement. The dem-

onstration projects have enabled hospitals

to test management techniques that are

both economically and environmentally

sustainable. As a result, the UMP-Africa/

IAGU programme stands as a model of

advocacy for sustainable biomedical waste

management across West Africa.

Salimata Seck is the IAGU Project Officer

in Dakar.

Making progress in safe waste management is an uphill struggle throughout Africa. Photo © UN-HABITAT/Saltbones.

19Habitat Debate December 2005 Conclusions

A mine of information

Awealth of information is one of theAAmost valuable assets of the Urban

Management Programme, especially the

lessons learned and the experienced gained

over the years through city consultations

around the world.

Sharing information and knowledge,

and building a strong knowledge manage-

ment system for urban management was

always central to the UMP.

Regional information strategies were

implemented to support information and

knowledge needs. Each strategy focused

on the needs of the region while at the

same time fitting in with the overall vision

and global strategy of the programme.

In the Arab States, for example, a strong

emphasis was placed on partnership with

the media, resulting in broad coverage and

awareness of UMP activities and issues in

the region and sustained information dis-

semination and exchange. In Africa and

the Latin America and Caribbean region,

under the Urbanet component of UMP,

an extensive database highlighting posi-

tive examples of local management and

models to solve urban problems has been

developed.

Information focal points in the anchor

institutions in Africa continue to work

on a consolidated knowledge manage-

ment strategy. In Asia, a regional website

and CD-ROMs have been used to distrib-

ute information on specific city consul-

tations. All regions are making more and

more use of the electronic media to fur-

ther spread the word on sustainable urban

management.

As part of its overall information strate-

gy, the UMP Core team and the Regional

Offices produced over 500 publications,

regional newsletters, flyers, papers and

other materials to support their work.

Carrying a wealth of information on ur-

ban problems, and ways of solving them,

they cover experiences from cities around

the world.

The UMP also supported UN-

HABITAT’s Global Campaign for Good

Governance framework. It thus advocated

good governance and inclusive, participa-

tory decision-making processes, building

capacity at the local and regional lev-

els and synthesizing lessons learned and

knowledge to contribute to the normative

debate at the global level.

Toolkits developed within the cam-

paign framework with key inputs from

the UMP have been widely disseminat-

ed. This will help the anchor institutions

network continue developing the norma-

tive framework and advocating good ur-

ban governance.

The many publications and working

papers produced by the programme clear-

ly reflect the different conditions, charac-

teristics and culture of each region and the

variations in implementation of the UMP

strategy.

The publications reflect in detail how

the city consultation process brought

about a major change in the mindset of

local government officials on transparen-

cy, accountability, efficiency and respon-

siveness. They show how cities can be

transformed from passive service provid-

ers into proactive facilitators of infrastruc-

ture and services. At the same time, they

show how excessive controls still exercised

at the national level in countries in Africa,

Asia, and the Arab States limit the func-

tional and financial responsibilities of lo-

cal authorities.

Today, much of this information is to

be found on the UN-HABITAT website

in the virtual library of the UMP’s CD-

ROM reviewed on page 21, and through

the anchor institutions listed on these

pages.

Visitors at the Shanghai City Planning Museum get a glimpse into what local authorities hope their will eventually look like.Photo © Qilai Shen / PANOS

20 Habitat Debate December 2005Best Practices

NigeriaA city consultation in Ijebu-Ode, Nigeria, was undertaken to pro-vide a new action plan focusing on income generation and im-proving provision to basic urban services. The scond-largest city in Ogun State, Ijebu-Ode has a population of approximate-ly 163,000.

The administration in the past decade had alienated itself byits top-down planning approach and its inability to improve thequality of life in urban areas. For a number of years only forms of traditional authority have held an on-going dialogue with com-munities. The traditional ruler in Ijebu-Ode was instrumental in mobilising the community during the city consultation process and providing support to the resulting action plan. The project also succeeded in breaking down a number of previous social barriers in the community.

The city consultation resulted in the setting up of local pov-erty reduction development board. The elected local govern-ment council (Local Government elections in 1999) was quicklyincorporated in development board by nominating the LocalGovernment Chairman as Vice-Chairman of the board, by ap-

the Development Board was ‘competing’ with the local ‘new’ government authority. This enabled the board managed to raise US $100,000 from community donations for implementation of the propject.

The main lesson learned was the need to fully integrate dif-ffferent forms of government and authority that are present in acity, both traditional and municipal, and to invest in raising their awareness of urban management issues and the city consulta-tion process.

Sri LankaThe municipality of Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka, ap-proached the UMP in 1997 in quest of help to build capacity

service delivery in a participatory drive involving local residents.From a 24-hour information centre and complaint desk opento all, the programme over the years created a new dynamism that brought several international agencies to Colombo such asthe Asian Development Bank, the Department for InternatinalDevelopment of the United Kingdom, the Konrad Adenauer Striftung of Germany, and UN-HABITAT’s Sustainable CitiesProgramme. The city consultation process succeeded mainly because of the willingness of the local government authoritiesto join hands with the public through the expertise of Sevanatha,UMP’s local partner NGO in Colombo. The key outcome of theprocess was the establishment of a multi-stakeholder forum for broad-based civic involvement in decision-making. With strong backing two successive mayors, it comprises the council, oth-er parastatal organisations, community development councils, NGOs and other civil society groups. An institutional frameworkwas prepared for community participation in development deci-sion-making, service delivery, and municipal tax collection. This led to improved access to shelter and basic services, better in-tegration of poor people, a reduction in pollution, more public-private partnerships to stimulate employment, administrative decentralisation and better governance, and enhanced interna-tional cooporeration. The example of Colombo has inspired oth-er cities to initiate better urban management practices.

ThailandAt a seminar in Bangkok six years’ ago, the deputy mayor of Nonthaburi City raised the need to develop an action plan to save Thailand’s last remaining urban canal in Nonthaburi prov-ince from destruction from by unregulated urban growth. UMPagreed to support joint activities of all 16 local governments withadministrative responsibility for the canal landscape, operatingunder the Nonthaburi Sustainable Canal Development Project.A project steering committee was formed and observers invit-ed from national agencies and the chamber of commerce. Themayors and heads of community administrations nominated a total of 31 project coordinators and deputy coordinators. The lo-cal governments formed an informal governmental group calledthe Grum Khon Rak Naam (GKRN). Organisational structure of the project succeeded in integrating a large group of govern-mental actors at two separate administrative levels.

The example of Nonthaburi illustrates that it is worth spend-ing time and effort to communicate project mechanisms to alllevels of government. The process by UMP in Nonthaburi hasattracted considerable media interest resulting in more resourc-es. The project has so far been quite successful especially in theimplementation of the Habitat Agenda including environmentalmanagement, economic development, governance and interna-tional cooperation.

TunisiaIn the early 1990s, the rapidly urbanising city of Kasserine with a population of 70,000 people, had one of the lowest employ-ment rates in the country, poor infrastructure unable to absorb itsgrowing population and a poverty rate of 15 percent comparedto the 9 percent national average. The municipality was seek-ing ways of strengthening relations between the local adminis-tration and residents, especially disadvantaged young people.UMP therefore found in the city a municipal team that realized usefulness of participatory approaches. The city consultationsagreed from the onset that that the youth problems should begiven priority. The consultations involved sensitizing and inform-ing the city council and mobilizing neighbourhood youth around

municipal youth council had been established, along with a se-ries of community youth centres. The action plan for poverty re-duction in Kasserine led to the establishment of daycare centresand nurseries employing local young women, home help for the elderly and the handicapped, and small businesses owned and operated by young providing auto repair, construction, gar-dening and cleaning services — all neighbourhood-based. TheUMP fostered project has helped mobilise funding for the con-tinued implementation of the action plan, and additional fundingis being leveraged to continue the battle against unemployment.

the city’s youth was conducted that led to a new strategy for bet-ter integration of young people in the city. The plan has helped transform Kasserine into a city with more opporitunities, better employment prospects and new hope for the future.

21Habitat Debate December 2005 New Publications


Interactive CD-ROM

With the UMP winding up,

every effort has been made to

prepare a comprehensive data-

base of all UMP outputs on a

CD-ROM. The interactive CD-

ROM has been produced and

contains electronic versions of

publications, reports and infor-

mation from the UMP Global

and Regional Offices. Many of the very useful publications

include all of the working and occasional papers and UMP

Formal Series publications from the four regions, in elec-

tronic format. The CD-ROM also contains a comprehensive

search facility for easy access of documents. This document

constitutes an essential urban management resource tool. To

obtain a copy, please send an email to [email protected].

Urban-Rural Linkages Approach to Sustainable Development

ISBN: 92-1-131751-7HS: 765/05ELanguage: EnglishPublisher: UN-HABITAT, 2005

This publication looks at the re-

lationship between rural and

urban areas, and the econom-

ic, social and environmental in-

terdependence between towns

and cities and their hinterlands.

It argues that sustainable devel-

opment is more likely to be re-

alised if the development of

both ends of this human set-

tlements continuum is consid-

ered holistically. With nearly

half the global population, and

three-quarters of the population of developed countries now

living in urban areas, the development problems of cities

cannot be effectively addressed by only tackling problems

within the cities themselves. Although the rural popula-

tions of developing countries is still above 60 percent, these

countries are rapidly urbanising as more and more people

seek better opportunities in towns. But a lack of employ-

ment prospects, inadequate services, poverty civil war and

natural disasters has seen a phenomenal growth of slums.

This is why UN-HABITAT considers the urban-rural link-

age approach so important to future sustainable develop-

ment. This report is one of two publications arising out of

the Inter-Regional Conference on Urban-Rural Linkages in

October 2004 organised by UN-HABITAT in cooperation

with the United Nations Environment Programme (NUEP),

the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), and the

International Institute of Environment and Development

(IIED).

International Migrants and the City

ISBN:92-1-131747-9HS:760/05EPrice:US$ 15Language:EnglishPublisher:UN-HABITAT and the Università IUAV di Venezia,2005

Jointly published by UN-

HABITAT and the Università

IUAV di Venezia, this work

gives an account of different pol-

icies, practices and governance

models that address interna-

tional migration in an urban-

izing world. The book reviews

the policies and practices of 10

cities – Bangkok, Berlin, Dakar,

Johannesburg, Karachi, Naples,

São Paulo, Tijuana, Vancouver

and Vladivostok. Key issues of

analysis include the impact of national policies on interna-

tional migration, the role of migrants in the local economy,

the relationship between local and migrant communities,

and the migrants’ use of urban space.

Towards the Poverty Eradication Goal – The Structure and Infrastructure of the

in Eastern Africa

ISBN: 92-1-131752-5HS:767/05ELanguage:EnglishPublisher:UN-HABITAT, 2005

As we move into the new mil-

lennium, one trend overwhelms

our concerns: the rapid urbani-

sation with growing poverty, and

burgeoning slums that create tre-

mendous challenges in achieving

the goal of adequate shelter for all.

At the same time, there are grow-

ing calls for people to take re-

sponsibility so that the poor can

help themselves. One solution is

the growing recognition in recent

years that microcredit is a good weapon in poverty reduction.

It was with this in mind that The United Nations designat-

ed 2005 as the International Year of Microcredit to increase

public awareness and understanding of the potential of micro-

credit. This publication, and an awareness-building workshop

that preceded it is part of UN-HABITAT’s efforts to promote

these objectives. It carries useful insights on how access to fi-

nancial services for the urban poor can be improved. It also

examines the policy, institutional, financial and legal oppor-

tunities and constraints for microcredit, and discusses ways of

solving its limitations for both providers and clients, with real

life examples.

INTERNAT IONALMIGRANTS AND THE CI TYBANGKOK BERLIN DAKAR KARACHIJOHANNESBURG NAPLESSÃO PAULO T IJUANAVANCOUVER VLADIVOSTOK

Marcel lo Balbo (ed)

Università Iuav di Venezia

22 Habitat Debate December 2005News & Events

New Deputy Executive Director

Swedish Ambassador, Inga Björk-Klevby as Deputy Executive Director of the UN-HABITAT.

Ms. Björk-Klevby, an economist, is ambassador to Côted’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, after having been in charge of Sweden’s international development co-operation policies, programmes and budget for years. She also spent more than twodecades in internation-

Bank of Sweden, theInternational MonetaryFund (IMF), the WorldBank, the AsianDevelopment Bank andthe African DevelopmentBank.

The main task of the Deputy ExecutiveDirector of UN-HABITATis to revitalize and over-see the management of the Habitat and HumanSettlements Foundationso that it can contrib-ute effectively to the wa-ter and sanitation goalsand the slum upgradingtargets of the Millennium Declaration, as requested at the United Nations World Summit in September.

Prior to her current assignment, Ms. Björk-Klevby served as the Ambassador of Sweden to Kenya, Rwanda, Seychelles and the Comoros and as Permanent Representative to the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT). During this period, she was involved in restructuring the UN Centre for Human Settlements, leading to its current upgraded status as a Programme. She holds a master’s degree from the Stockholm School of Economics and is married with two children.

A new international drive for better citiesThe International Platform on Sustainable Urban Development, adopted the “Geneva Declaration for a viable future in cities” with the objective of creating a world solidarity network for bet-ter human settlements.

Organized by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, the Republic and Canton of Geneva, and the City of Geneva the 11-13 October meeting drew over 2,600 partic-ipants including mayors, international and local organisations, managers from the public and private sectors, researchers, experts, students and others interested in sustainable urban development.

UN-HABITAT, represented at the meeting its Acting Deputy

four workshops. These covered promoting international partner-ships through best practices, Social Housing in Eastern Europe

needs assessment, and promoting safer, crime-free cities.

A new record for World Habitat Day observancesNearly 80 events in 55 countries were held towns and cit-ies around the world to mark this year’s World Habitat Day on Monday 3 October at ceremonies, seminars and meetings at-tended by many government and local authority representatives

-ing conditions of the urban poor and their basic right to ade-quate shelter.

The 2005 theme was “The Millennium Development Goals andthe City” with the main celebrations in Jakarta, Indonesia drawingover 1,000 people from Indonesia and abroad. The event was in-augurated by Indonesia’s Vice-President, Mr. Jusuf Kalla.

In his address, the Governor of Jakarta, who received the Scroll of Honour on behalf of the Municipality of Jakarta high-lighted the problems of the mega-city. The city, which has over 10million people, has a high population density, averaging 14,000 people per square kilometre and rising to 30,000 in some are-

-tion, and water and air pollution. Governor Sutiyoso outlined the Municipality’s plans to improve Jakarta, including providing al-most 12,000 housing units to meet the housing needs of low and middle income households. He welcomed the support of UN-HABITAT to help build an environmentally friendly city.

The diversity of the cities, towns and countries that marked the event underscored the importance World Habitat Day continues to be accorded globally. Some of the countries that marked the event included Benin, Chad, Kenya, Ethiopia, The Netherlands,Nigeria, United Kingdom, Spain, Fiji, Mexico, Brazil, Haiti, Palestine territories, Bangladesh, India, Canada and USA.

Urban development conference in ChinaUN-HABITAT, the European Commission and the Government of China held a three-day conference last month called to discuss urban governance, sustainable housing, and land-use and plan-ning. Mrs. Tibaijuka told participants that sustainable urban de-velopment would remain “an illusion” if the urban poor, who are the majority of the urban population in most developing coun-tries, remained excluded from decision-making. The conference was held in Nanning, the capital of the Guangxi Autonomous Region of China.

UN-HABITAT to the rescue of Pakistani quake victimsFollowing the devastating earthquake in Kashmir that claimed thousands of lives in October, UN-HABITAT offered the agency’s immediate support with emergency relief and recovery.

In a letter to Pakistan’s President, General Pervez Musharraf,Mrs. Tibaijuka expressed her dismay and condolences and pledged immediate assistance. At the same time, UN-HABITAT staff and experts were sent to Pakistan to help both the govern-ment and the United Nations Resident Coordinator effectively address and coordinate immediate and transition elements re-lated to shelter and settlements recovery.

UN-HABITAT also appealed to the donor community for ap-proximately US$ 8 million to bring relief to more than 150,000families affected by the 7.6 magnitude earthquake that struckclose to Muzaffarabad in Pakistan-administered Kashmir on Saturday morning. Estimates have it that upto 40,000 people could have perished in the quake.

the main areas affected have been Kashmir and Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province.

23Habitat Debate December 2005 News & Events

Citing recent lessons learned in disaster recovery operations, Mrs. Tibaijuka reiterated a plea to sister agencies, non-govern-mental organizations, and UN-HABITAT partners to ensure that initiation of recovery programming in the earliest stages of crisis response, can ease the transition from emergency, through re-construction to genuine recovery and development.

Major Norwegian boost for UN-HABITAT’s water and sanitation trust fundNorway announced that it would grant UN-HABITAT’s Water and Sanitation Trust Fund nearly US$ 7 million in 2005 to help alle-viate the water and sanitation crisis confronting millions of slum dwellers across Africa and Asia.

Norway’s contribution to the Water and Sanitation Trust Fund began in 2003 with an initial contribution of US$280,000. This was followed by a commitment announced by Norway’s Minister of International Development, Ms. Hilde Johnson that Oslo would contribute US$ 6.9 million for 2005, as well as additional regular

total Norwegian contribution to the fund stands at approximate-ly $1.8million.

The Trust Fund has helped UN-HABITAT forge strategic partnership arrangements with the African Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank, promoting pro-poor invest-ments in urban areas through its Water for Cities Programme in Africa and Asia. Thirteen African countries – Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Tanzania,

-ly involved in the programme.

Global Parliamentarians on HabitatOver 170 legislators from Africa, Asia, Europe and the United States attending the Fifth Global Parliamentarians on Habitat Forum in Rabat, Morocco in adopted the Rabat Declaration ad-

-

mechanism to cope with natural disasters. The lawmakers sup-ported the strengthening of UN-HABITAT, especially in its slumupgrading initiatives and the establishment of a database on good practices in urban development and improvement of infor-mal settlements. Mrs. Tibaijuka said currently, more than one bil-lion people were living in slums and inner cities and that if present

would imply that one in four people on this planet would be living without adequate shelter and without access to clean water and

consider that over half of all slum dwellers are under the age of 25,” she said. The meeting also discussed rural-urban migration and migration from southern countries to the more prosperous northern regions. Many attributed the November wave of arson attacks in French cities to a lack of decent housing and poor em-ployment prospects for young people.

Climbing Africa’s highest

crimeThe United Nations Federal Credit Union (UNFCU) and UN-HABITAT are supporting a climb to the summit of Africa’s highest peak, Mount Kilimanjaro, 25 February to 1 March 2006 aimed at improving safety in east African cities.

The idea came from Tim Challen, a UNFCU representative in Nairobi, who sustained serious gunshot injuries during an armed

robbery. Since then, he has decided to use that event to raise

projects in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya.Mr. Challen teamed up with UN-HABITAT’s Safer Cities

Programme. “Having experienced some of their harsh realities,I wanted to help makeEast African communitiessafer places in which to live,” said Mr. Challen. “If this climb can inspire oneperson not to give up on their dreams and to be-lieve that their life can im-prove, I feel our missionwill have succeeded.”

Mr. Challen will leada party of 25 young people up the moun-tain in a quest to raise US$50,000.

are proud to work with Tim and UNFCU to continue to strength-en civic responsibility within communities, engage youth and pre-vent crime,” said Mrs. Tibaijuka. “The climb represents a mission of hope and a true lesson in overcoming adversity.”

The launch for the Kilimanjaro Initiative coincides with the UNInternational Year of Sport, Development and Peace Conference– itself a prime mover in enhancing safe spaces through sports and youth development.

“UNFCU supports Tim’s remarkable climb and his ability tochannel his energies from a harmful experience into buildinghope and a brighter future for others,” said Mr. Michael Connery,President and CEO of UNFCU.

A website, (www.kilimanjaroinitiative.org) has been set up for further information. Donations to the Kilimanjaro Challenge Fundcan be made through the UNFCU’s website, www.unfcu.org.

Upcoming Events 9th Special Session of the UNEP Governing Council

Dubai International Conference Centre, UAE 7-9 February 2006

Third Session of the World Urban ForumVancouver, 19-23 June, 2006

World Habitat Awards 2006The UK-based Building and Social Housing Foundation iscurrently seeking entries for the World Habitat Awards 2006. The awards, which carry prize money of 10,000 pounds ster-ling, are presented each year on World Habitat Day on the

Upcoming issues of Habitat DebateSubject to changes, the issues planned for the year 2006 willcover energy (Vol. 12, No. 1), migration (Vol. 12, No. 2), theWorld Habitat Day theme (to be announced, Vol 12, No. 3) anddisaster management (Vol 12, No. 4). UN-HABITAT does not pay for articles or letters submitted, and these are published strictly at the discretion of the Editor and the Editorial Board of Habitat Debate. The agency will not enter into verbal, postal or e-mail discussion on any articles or letters it deems unsuitable for pub-lication. Write to [email protected], or send a fax to +25420-623477. Our postal address is: Information Services Section (Habitat Debate), UN-HABITAT, P.O. Box 30030 GPO, 00100, Nairobi, Kenya.

Headquarters

UN-HABITATP.O. Box 30030, GPO,Nairobi, 00100, KenyaTel: (254-20) 623120Fax: (254-20) 624266/624267/624264/623477/624060E-mail: [email protected]:http://www.unhabitat.org/

Africa and the Arab States

Africa and the Arab StatesP.O. Box 30030, GPO,Nairobi, 00100, KenyaTel: (254-20) 621234/623221Fax: (254-20) 623904/623328

E-mail: [email protected]:http://www.unhabitat.org/roaas/

ACROS Fukuoka Building, 8th Floor1-1-1 Tenjin, Chuo-kuFukuoka 810-0001, JapanTel: (81-92) 724-7121Fax: (81-92) 724-7124E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.fukuoka.unhabi-tat.org

Latin America and the Caribbean

Latin America and the Caribbean

America Latina y el Caribe (ROLAC)Av. Presidente Vargas, 3131/130420210-030 - Rio de Janeiro RJ,BrazilTel: (55-21) 2515-1700Fax: (55-21) 2515-1701E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.unhabitat-rolac.org

Two United Nations PlazaRoom DC2-0943New York, N.Y. 10017, U.S.A.Tel: (1-212) 963-8725/963-4200Fax: (1-212) 963-8721E-mail: [email protected]

ONU-HABITAT Bureau de GenèveMaison Internationale de l’Environnement 2International Environment House 27, Chemin de Balexert5th FloorCH-1219 Châtelaine, GenèvePostal address:

Palais des NationsAvenue de la Paix 8-14CH-1211 Genève 10, SwitzerlandTel: (41-0) 22 917-86 46/7/8Fax: (41-0) 22 917-80 46E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.unhabitat.org

with the European Union andBelgium14 rue MontoyerB-1000 Brussels, BelgiumTel: (32-2) 503-35-72(32-2) 503-1004Fax: (32-2) 503-46-24E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]: www.unhabitat.org

Hungary

H-1124 BudapestNémetvölgyi út 41. 2. ep. 1.1.,HungaryTel/Fax: (36-1) 202-2490E-mail:[email protected]

India

5th Floor (East Wing)Thalamuthu Natarajan Building(CMDA Building)Egmore, Chennai 600 008IndiaTel: (91-44) 2841-1302Fax: (91-44) 2851-6273E-mail: [email protected]

China

No. 9 Sanlihe RoadBeijing 100835People’s Republic of ChinaTel: (86-10) 6839-4750, 68350647Fax: (86-10) 6839-4749E-mail: [email protected]:http://www.cin.gov.cn/habitat

Russian FederationUN-HABITAT Executive Bureau inMoscow8, Stroiteley Street,Building 2

Moscow, 119991Russian FederationTel: (7-095) 930-6264Fax: (7-095) 930-0379E-mail: [email protected]: www.unhabitatmoscow.ru

UN-HABITAT OFFICES

Documents

Habitat Debate Vol.11 No. 4, Legacy of the Urban Management Programme